In 2016, Rob
Bowman posted the following article:
In this
article, Bowman argued that 2 Nephi 5:16's use of "temple of Solomon"
to designate the temple in Jerusalem was an anachronism, as no Israelite,
contemporary with Nephi, would have called a temple "temple of <patron/builder
of the temple>" and instead "Temple of YHWH."
He was
soundly refuted by myself and especially my friend Christopher Davis, so much
that Bowman conceded it was not an anachronism
(with us agreeing that the construct state is not strong evidence for the Book
of Mormon).
However, in
recent days, Bowman, in a discussion with a friend on an Evangelical/LDS debate
forum on facebook, has been denying he has been soundly refuted on this point.
For this reason, I am posting a link to the definitive beat-down of Bowman and
his nonsense:
For a scholarly article on the booth of David in Amos 9 being the temple in Jerusalem, see:
John Anthony Dunne, “David’s Tent as Temple in Amos 9:11-15: Understanding the Epilogue of Amos & Considering Implications for the Unity of the Book,” Westminster Theological Journal 73.2 (Fall 2011): 363-374
